All cards up from Quadro NVS 130M the NVidia Quadro NVS Series (Notebooks) work with the NVidia package (Linux Display Driver - x86 310.44 2.4.20, the nvidia package in pacman, https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?name=nvidia , as confirmed by the nvidia website: http://www.nvidia.de/Download/Find.aspx?lang=en&QNF=1 )

−

----

+

The 130M was issued in 2007, the 140M was build into the popular ThinkPad T61, so there will be quite a lot of people who have one of those.

−

== Suggestions ==

+

All other cards in this series (110M and 120M) work with the nvidia-304xx package from the official repositories.

−

NVoption Online Version - great tool to make tv-out easy and fast

+

== (U)EFI support ==

+

+

I was told in [https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=136807 this thread] that the proprietary nvidia drivers do not work with EFI (by what appeared to be a senior community member), and repeated attempts to install the drivers on a UEFI system have met with little success. As a result, I am placing the warning back. Apologies if this isn't in keeping with wiki etiquette!

:I had success using the nvidia driver on a efi system by adding 'nomodeset' to the kernel parameters. This prevents kms from loading, which causes a blank screen and is probably the source of the problems most users are seeing. X afterwards works just fine. I was able to play Doom 3 with a high fps rate :)

Since most of the wiki is aimed at new users anyway: why differentiate between the Xorg client and server? [[User:Manolo|manolo]] 19:23, 9 November 2009 (EST)

+

== XRandR support ==

+

As far as i understand it the recent drivers support XRANDR, which is probably much better than Xinerama/Twinview. Should we remove the Xinerame/Twinview instructions alltogether and just mention to use the standard XRandR methods for multiscreen setups?

−

: Just got to say thanks for you edits Manolo, you're doing a great job on the wiki. As for Xorg naming, their is no client only a server ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xorg Wikepedia]). However, the nomenclature of it is a bit awkward. Xorg server got its' name from when the popular design philosophy was that computer hubs would essential be dum-terminals (i.e. not have an graphic card) and one machine would handle the graphic load. It's sort of an outdated (and awkward) term now but is still used and the proper and common wording.

+

== NVoption Online ==

−

:: --[[User:Gen2ly|Gen2ly]] 01:34, 10 November 2009 (EST)

−

:: Thanks for the clarification/compliments. So if I understand correctly, "Xorg" is referring to "Xorg server"? [[User:Manolo|manolo]] 02:05, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Logging out, or switching to a different terminal using ctrl+alt+F<2-9> consistently resulted in a black screen, and killing Xorg with ctrl-alt-backspace resulted in a terminal screen with only the top line visible. It turned out that a 'vga=773' added to kernel line was the cause of this. After removing that the problem was solved. Probably something to do with KMS? B.t.w. I have only used x with 'startx', so possibly specific for that way of starting X.

Logging out, or switching to a different terminal using ctrl+alt+F<2-9> consistently resulted in a black screen, and killing Xorg with ctrl-alt-backspace resulted in a terminal screen with only the top line visible. It turned out that a 'vga=773' added to kernel line was the cause of this. After removing that the problem was solved. Probably something to do with KMS? B.t.w. I have only used x with 'startx', so possibly specific for that way of starting X.

Line 32:

Line 43:

Well the thing is that vga= is meant for the proprietary drivers only - open source drivers already set the native resolution without a vga command. It can be removed from the beginners' guide though, since it breaks open source drivers, and if the card doesn't support the vga command, it breaks the closed source ones too. [[User:Thestinger|thestinger]] 20:13, 13 December 2010 (EST)

Well the thing is that vga= is meant for the proprietary drivers only - open source drivers already set the native resolution without a vga command. It can be removed from the beginners' guide though, since it breaks open source drivers, and if the card doesn't support the vga command, it breaks the closed source ones too. [[User:Thestinger|thestinger]] 20:13, 13 December 2010 (EST)

::I commented out the info about older drivers, since they're not compatible with Xorg 1.11. Maybe if someone create the appropriate packages for Xorg 1.10 in AUR, then we could add back some info, but until it's misleading I think. --[[User:City-busz|City-busz]] 23:32, 3 November 2011 (EDT)

+

:::nvidia-96xx and nvidia-71xx are in the AUR, you can't use pacman to install them. -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] 00:03, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

+

::::You can't install these packages from AUR, because they requires Xorg 1.10/1.7, which is not available in official repos, nor in AUR. Once NVidia make them compatible with Xorg 1.11, then someone should add them back to the official repos. Another option is to someone create xorg-server-1.10, xf86-input-evdev-1.10 etc. packages to support these drivers. --[[User:City-busz|City-busz]] 01:31, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

+

:::::You can use [[Downgrading_Packages#ARM|ARM]] or some other mirror that holds old packages and still use nvidia-173xx and older drivers. My question is, why did you put {{ic|# pacman -S nvidia-96xx nvidia-96xx-utils}} instead of "install {{AUR|nvidia-96xx-all}} and {{AUR|nvidia-96xx-utils}} from the [[AUR]]."??

+

:::::The latter still works with out of date packages while the former does not, because I'm not aware of any repo that has nvidia-96xx. -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] 09:06, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

+

::::::It's possible, but it requires further explanation (maybe in a new section). Simply install nvidia-* packages from AUR is not work currently. --[[User:City-busz|City-busz]] 10:20, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

+

:::::::And installing them with pacman does work? I still don't get this change. -- [[User:Karol|Karol]] 11:16, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

+

+

The following section was commented in the article. I am moving it here instead:

+

+

These drivers are not compatible with the latest Xorg release in the official repo.

Can anyone verify that the BIOS related suggestions work and are not coincidentally set (either automatically when changing the IRQ or turning off ACPI) while troubleshooting? I have found little information that confirms any of the suggestions would work. The file permissions thing seems to be completely unfounded and never works (as noted in the article) that I could find. It would probably be a good idea if we cleaned out items that have not been verified to work. For my setup I was having this error and none of the items in the wiki nor the many file permission search results worked. -- [[User:Clickthem|click, them so hard]] 19:16, 4 March 2012 (EST)

+

:I've added an Accuracy template, please next time add it yourself so that discussions like this are more visible. -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] 05:40, 6 March 2012 (EST)

+

+

== Rewrite ==

+

I think the "Installing" section is a little ambiguous and could use a bit of rewording. Because the steps are numbered, and little indication is given otherwise, it is implied that you need both the packages named like nvidia-173xx, ''and'' the regular nvidia packages. I don't actually have my nvidia drivers working properly, so maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but if I'm right in assuming that you need ''either'' the specifically named drivers like nvidia-173xx ''or'' the plain ol' nvidia drivers, step 2 needs to be reworded. I would suggest displaying two separate [code] blocks, one with # pacman -S nvidia-173xx nvidia-173xx-utils, and the one that's there now. Then make it explicitly clear that you need to do one or the other, not both. --[[User:Sotanaht|Sotanaht]] 18:45, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

+

+

Oh, I forgot that the nvidia-173xx drivers were not in the official repos. Scratch the part about including the command for installing that. I still think it's important to make clear that people using the nvidia-173xx drivers ''do not need'' the regular nvidia drivers. Also make it clear that people using the regular nvidia drivers do not need any nvidia-XXXxx drivers. --[[User:Sotanaht|Sotanaht]] 18:49, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

+

+

:Well, I've never had to use the old Nvidia drivers, but the note says that the old modules don't support Xorg 1.11 (Arch provides 1.12 now). Unless the situation has changed, those drivers are useless unless you also write instructions on how to safely downgrade Xorg. Please correct me if I'm wrong. -- [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 11:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

−

I created a Tip at the end of the Install section saying just that, because many people install the drivers, 'startx' and <sadface>.

Firefox performs quite poorly for me, so I tried this suggestion and it ended up breaking my WM. All new window borders changed to solid white and would not move around. Can someone else confirm? If so there should probably be a note or amendment to the suggestion. [[User:Biltong|Biltong]] ([[User talk:Biltong|talk]])

−

== /var/abs/extra/nvidia/ no such file or directory ==

+

== Run a test ==

−

When trying to follow this page's instructions regarding a custom kernel, after successfully installing abs I am unable to cp -r /var/abs/extra/nvidia/ because I get a no such file or directory error. In fact, there is nothing in /var/abs/ except "README" and a "local" directory, which also has no "extra" or "nvidia" dir. Are these instructions outdated? [[User:Brianwc|Brianwc]] 12:43, 7 January 2011 (EST)

+

There is confusing paragraph saying ''You can run a test to see if the Xorg server will function correctly without a configuration file.''. IMHO, it should be clarified what kind of test the author has in mind, an exact command would be helpful. Currently, this suggestion is simply confusing, especially to less experienced users. --[[User:Mloskot|Mloskot]] ([[User talk:Mloskot|talk]]) 19:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The 130M was issued in 2007, the 140M was build into the popular ThinkPad T61, so there will be quite a lot of people who have one of those.

All other cards in this series (110M and 120M) work with the nvidia-304xx package from the official repositories.

(U)EFI support

I was told in this thread that the proprietary nvidia drivers do not work with EFI (by what appeared to be a senior community member), and repeated attempts to install the drivers on a UEFI system have met with little success. As a result, I am placing the warning back. Apologies if this isn't in keeping with wiki etiquette!

I had success using the nvidia driver on a efi system by adding 'nomodeset' to the kernel parameters. This prevents kms from loading, which causes a blank screen and is probably the source of the problems most users are seeing. X afterwards works just fine. I was able to play Doom 3 with a high fps rate :)

XRandR support

As far as i understand it the recent drivers support XRANDR, which is probably much better than Xinerama/Twinview. Should we remove the Xinerame/Twinview instructions alltogether and just mention to use the standard XRandR methods for multiscreen setups?

NVoption Online

Reword

Maybe someone can put this in better words:
Logging out, or switching to a different terminal using ctrl+alt+F<2-9> consistently resulted in a black screen, and killing Xorg with ctrl-alt-backspace resulted in a terminal screen with only the top line visible. It turned out that a 'vga=773' added to kernel line was the cause of this. After removing that the problem was solved. Probably something to do with KMS? B.t.w. I have only used x with 'startx', so possibly specific for that way of starting X.
rwd

Was it with this driver or nouveau? The proprietary drivers don't have KMS. thestinger 17:42, 13 December 2010 (EST)

Well the thing is that vga= is meant for the proprietary drivers only - open source drivers already set the native resolution without a vga command. It can be removed from the beginners' guide though, since it breaks open source drivers, and if the card doesn't support the vga command, it breaks the closed source ones too. thestinger 20:13, 13 December 2010 (EST)

Nvidia 173xx

The nvidia-173xx package no longer exists (29 Oct 2011).

Has it been replaced by nvidia-173xx-all? If so, this package hasn't been updated since Feb 2011.

Will it need to be updated to be able to use the latest xorg 1.11?

In the meantime, please include instructions for which xorg related packages pacman should ignore.

I commented out the info about older drivers, since they're not compatible with Xorg 1.11. Maybe if someone create the appropriate packages for Xorg 1.10 in AUR, then we could add back some info, but until it's misleading I think. --City-busz 23:32, 3 November 2011 (EDT)

nvidia-96xx and nvidia-71xx are in the AUR, you can't use pacman to install them. -- Karol 00:03, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

You can't install these packages from AUR, because they requires Xorg 1.10/1.7, which is not available in official repos, nor in AUR. Once NVidia make them compatible with Xorg 1.11, then someone should add them back to the official repos. Another option is to someone create xorg-server-1.10, xf86-input-evdev-1.10 etc. packages to support these drivers. --City-busz 01:31, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

You can use ARM or some other mirror that holds old packages and still use nvidia-173xx and older drivers. My question is, why did you put # pacman -S nvidia-96xx nvidia-96xx-utils instead of "install nvidia-96xx-allAUR and nvidia-96xx-utilsAUR from the AUR."??

The latter still works with out of date packages while the former does not, because I'm not aware of any repo that has nvidia-96xx. -- Karol 09:06, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

It's possible, but it requires further explanation (maybe in a new section). Simply install nvidia-* packages from AUR is not work currently. --City-busz 10:20, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

And installing them with pacman does work? I still don't get this change. -- Karol 11:16, 4 November 2011 (EDT)

The following section was commented in the article. I am moving it here instead:

These drivers are not compatible with the latest Xorg release in the official repo.

custom kernel

'/dev/nvidia0' Input/Output error... suggested fixes

Can anyone verify that the BIOS related suggestions work and are not coincidentally set (either automatically when changing the IRQ or turning off ACPI) while troubleshooting? I have found little information that confirms any of the suggestions would work. The file permissions thing seems to be completely unfounded and never works (as noted in the article) that I could find. It would probably be a good idea if we cleaned out items that have not been verified to work. For my setup I was having this error and none of the items in the wiki nor the many file permission search results worked. -- click, them so hard 19:16, 4 March 2012 (EST)

I've added an Accuracy template, please next time add it yourself so that discussions like this are more visible. -- Kynikos 05:40, 6 March 2012 (EST)

Rewrite

I think the "Installing" section is a little ambiguous and could use a bit of rewording. Because the steps are numbered, and little indication is given otherwise, it is implied that you need both the packages named like nvidia-173xx, and the regular nvidia packages. I don't actually have my nvidia drivers working properly, so maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but if I'm right in assuming that you need either the specifically named drivers like nvidia-173xx or the plain ol' nvidia drivers, step 2 needs to be reworded. I would suggest displaying two separate [code] blocks, one with # pacman -S nvidia-173xx nvidia-173xx-utils, and the one that's there now. Then make it explicitly clear that you need to do one or the other, not both. --Sotanaht 18:45, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

Oh, I forgot that the nvidia-173xx drivers were not in the official repos. Scratch the part about including the command for installing that. I still think it's important to make clear that people using the nvidia-173xx drivers do not need the regular nvidia drivers. Also make it clear that people using the regular nvidia drivers do not need any nvidia-XXXxx drivers. --Sotanaht 18:49, 17 May 2012 (EDT)

Well, I've never had to use the old Nvidia drivers, but the note says that the old modules don't support Xorg 1.11 (Arch provides 1.12 now). Unless the situation has changed, those drivers are useless unless you also write instructions on how to safely downgrade Xorg. Please correct me if I'm wrong. -- Kynikos (talk) 11:27, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Firefox performs quite poorly for me, so I tried this suggestion and it ended up breaking my WM. All new window borders changed to solid white and would not move around. Can someone else confirm? If so there should probably be a note or amendment to the suggestion. Biltong (talk)

Run a test

There is confusing paragraph saying You can run a test to see if the Xorg server will function correctly without a configuration file.. IMHO, it should be clarified what kind of test the author has in mind, an exact command would be helpful. Currently, this suggestion is simply confusing, especially to less experienced users. --Mloskot (talk) 19:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)